Why does PP go down when you do this?

  • Thread starter moby323
  • 56 comments
  • 7,373 views
I’m guessing it’s because the car doesn’t have enough downforce. I guess it’s also possible that the turbo lag could get worse?
 
Last edited:
As a tyre manufacturer once said, "power is nothing without control." It is entirely possible to have a car with too much power that can't deliver that power to the road, or delivers it in such a way to make it harder to drive, than a car that has less power but is more planted.

Although there also is the fact the PP system is broken in several ways.
How are we supposed to know? Ask Kaz on twitter or something.
Thanks for that helpful insight. Sometimes you don't have to post...
 
PP glitches happen and they can be to your benefit for certain events. Example: adding the fully customizable racing transmission to the engine swapped Suzuki Cappuccino makes the PP drop around 75 points and it’s one of the best cars for the Tokyo Expressway 600pp grind race because of it.
 
There are a couple things it could be.

It looks like you’re comparing a swap from high rpm turbo to ultra, is that right?

I did the same thing with the base car for that engine to get the same torque and HP stats.

It may behave different in the swap version but it also could be as simple as a ballast/weight & aero combination at that power, like a glitch. You can test this by altering the aero/ballast/weight to see if it changes back to a higher pp

When there’s a glitch like this (and they’re common) you will often see the number for “High Speed Rotational G” go down, which saves pp.

For example, sometimes evening removing the ballast to a certain number makes the pp less when it should go higher; again, it will be reflected by a decrease in the “rotational g” section

IMG_4137.png
 
There are a couple things it could be.

It looks like you’re comparing a swap from high rpm turbo to ultra, is that right?

I did the same thing with the base car for that engine to get the same torque and HP stats.

It may behave different in the swap version but it also could be as simple as a ballast/weight & aero combination at that power, like a glitch. You can test this by altering the aero/ballast/weight to see if it changes back to a higher pp

When there’s a glitch like this (and they’re common) you will often see the number for “High Speed Rotational G” go down, which saves pp.

For example, sometimes evening removing the ballast to a certain number makes the pp less when it should go higher; again, it will be reflected by a decrease in the “rotational g” section

View attachment 1259708
You are looking at a different car, OP asked for the engine swapped BRZ.
But anyway, you are right, PP decrease can often be seen in a change of the G values.
These changes are what is puzzeling sometimes, but sometimes also correct, for example in case the engine is delivering too much power causing an upset in acceleration balance, or with a shift in weight distribution making the car unstable.
PP going down isnt always a bug, but at the same time PP is so bad of a reprensation of performance.
 
You are looking at a different car, OP asked for the engine swapped BRZ.
But anyway, you are right, PP decrease can often be seen in a change of the G values.
These changes are what is puzzeling sometimes, but sometimes also correct, for example in case the engine is delivering too much power causing an upset in acceleration balance, or with a shift in weight distribution making the car unstable.
PP going down isnt always a bug, but at the same time PP is so bad of a reprensation of performance.
Yes, I pulled up the car that donates his engine swap hoping to isolate if it’s just changing to that turbo (on same engine) lowers the pp or if it only happens after swap as sometimes higher power turbo has less pp (like when a slightly less powerful med turbo boosts pp more from a better power band)

I agree with you its not always a true glitch but when we add or remove one kg of ballast or change its distribution a single point the Rotational g and pp shouldn’t drop significantly

I do agree with you on everything 👍
 
Last edited:
Is the new engine heavier? The power to weight ratio went down with the new engine, likely where the PP loss came from.
 
Is the new engine heavier? The power to weight ratio went down with the new engine, likely where the PP loss came from.
It is weight to power, blue means "better", less weight per power because power went up -> 1000kg to 500hp would be 2kg/hp 1000kg to 1000hp would be 1kg/hp ;)

Edit: and as BobDx123 previously pointed out, the performance change on the screen is identical to his example of fitting the specific turbo. So no change in weight.
 
Last edited:
Is the new engine heavier? The power to weight ratio went down with the new engine, likely where the PP loss came from.
Right, but that’s not the swap engine screen and the evaluation doesn’t show a change in weight. It is the perfect difference between high and ultra turbo
 
The Ultra High RPM gives you more peak power but probably less power on the powerband in general, I suppose.
Usually the High RPM turbo upgrade gives you more peak power but lower PP than the Medium RPM turbo upgrade, because the Medium RPM gives you power on a more usable powerband.
On the original recipient of that engine, the '97 Supra RZ the PP increases slightly probably because of the chassis/aero characteristics of the car, supposedly an increase on the general performance of the car, that doesn't theoretically doesn't happen on the Subaru.
Of course this is the PP calculation alghoritm, not necessarily translated to the track.
 
Because the car in that configuration does worse in the simulated tests that make up the PP calculation.
Are there situations where it shows a decrease in PP calculation but in reality the car is much better?
 
There are a couple things it could be.

It looks like you’re comparing a swap from high rpm turbo to ultra, is that right?

I did the same thing with the base car for that engine to get the same torque and HP stats.

It may behave different in the swap version but it also could be as simple as a ballast/weight & aero combination at that power, like a glitch. You can test this by altering the aero/ballast/weight to see if it changes back to a higher pp

When there’s a glitch like this (and they’re common) you will often see the number for “High Speed Rotational G” go down, which saves pp.

For example, sometimes evening removing the ballast to a certain number makes the pp less when it should go higher; again, it will be reflected by a decrease in the “rotational g” section

View attachment 1259708
Are there situations where it shows a decrease in PP calculation but in reality the car is much better?
 
Are there situations where it shows a decrease in PP calculation but in reality the car is much better?
Not directly (as far as I am aware of), but because of the PP drop you can do other things to again increase PP to a level still within the chosen events limit.
 
As a tyre manufacturer once said, "power is nothing without control." It is entirely possible to have a car with too much power that can't deliver that power to the road, or delivers it in such a way to make it harder to drive, than a car that has less power but is more planted.
What does a 1200hp Supra and a 700hp Supra have in common? They both run 11s in the quarter-mile. :D

*The joke is the 1200hp Supra can't get the power down so it ties one with much less hp in a race (yes, I know the trap would be higher but that's not the point).
 
I have a strong feeling once you hit around 160mph you’ll find out why, depending on your tire choice and suspension/aero settings. The good news is with a bit of testing and tuning you can really take advantage of that turbo on the right tracks.
 
I’m a little bothered by the lack of detail on PD’s part. In this case taking out the 2L 4 cylinder engine, for a 3.5L V6, would add a fair bit of weight to a car. PD is usually decent at those little details, but not in this case.

Heck, years ago my buddy had to swap the springs out of the front of his civic, after swapping the 1.6 out for an H22(2.2L), and that’s only going up .6 in displacement.
 
Last edited:
I’m a little bothered by the lack of detail on PD’s part. In this case taking out the 2L 4 cylinder engine, for a 3.5L V6, would add a fair bit of weight to a car. PD is usually decent at those little details, but not in this case.

Heck, years ago my buddy had to swap the springs out of the front of his civic, after sealing the 1.6 out for an H22, and that’s only going up .6 in displacement.
The 2JZ-GTE is a 3.0 inline 6, and the car does gain weight when you actually do the engine swap.
 
A higher power figure is nothing without context. Power under the curve could decrease. The max power might only be usable in a small power band. Creating more lag doesn't help drivability. A lot of these "max power" tunes are only good for drag racing, not road courses. Then there's putting the power to the ground.

Many variables.
 
Are there situations where it shows a decrease in PP calculation but in reality the car is much better?
Definitely. The PP score doesn’t say how good the car is, it is just used to determine if the car meets the regulations for some events.

You get a better idea of the actual performance by looking at the stats about acceleration and cornering, and thinking about how that might affect your lap times depending on what kind of circuits you’re going to be racing on.
 
Definitely. The PP score doesn’t say how good the car is, it is just used to determine if the car meets the regulations for some events.

You get a better idea of the actual performance by looking at the stats about acceleration and cornering, and thinking about how that might affect your lap times depending on what kind of circuits you’re going to be racing on.
Thanks
 
Are there situations where it shows a decrease in PP calculation but in reality the car is much better?

Yes, there are countless examples of that.

The specific tests the CPU simulates behind the scenes to determine the PP rating are simply not a good representation of in-game performance, especially now that it completely ignores suspension, transmission, and LSD settings.

There’s a good Escudo tune for Tokyo that’s only like 570 PP, even though it’s objectively much faster than way higher PP tunes.

Definitely. The PP score doesn’t say how good the car is, it is just used to determine if the car meets the regulations for some events.

You get a better idea of the actual performance by looking at the stats about acceleration and cornering, and thinking about how that might affect your lap times depending on what kind of circuits you’re going to be racing on.

The PP is literally calculated based off of the results of those cornering and acceleration tests.
 
As a tyre manufacturer once said, "power is nothing without control." It is entirely possible to have a car with too much power that can't deliver that power to the road, or delivers it in such a way to make it harder to drive, than a car that has less power but is more planted.

Although there also is the fact the PP system is broken in several ways.

Thanks for that helpful insight. Sometimes you don't have to post...

This ^
"Speed only counts if you can make the next corner" Jessica King

You can overpower a chassis. It maybe possible with tuning to correct for some of this but not all. Also look into doing a roll cage and chassis bracing to help. If you get less pp with the bracing, back out and try it again.
 
Last edited:
A lot of PP changes make no sense. Body stiffening almost always lowers it. Same with wide body mods.
 
The PP is literally calculated based off of the results of those cornering and acceleration tests.
Those are all independent variables. It’s impossible to compress them into a single number without losing almost all of the information. Which is why the PP score is for determining whether a car is eligible for an event - not for determining how good it is for said event. You will always get more and better information by looking at the acceleration and cornering results than at the final score.
 
Those are all independent variables. It’s impossible to compress them into a single number without losing almost all of the information. Which is why the PP score is for determining whether a car is eligible for an event - not for determining how good it is for said event. You will always get more and better information by looking at the acceleration and cornering results than at the final score.

Wrong.
 
Last edited:
The PP is literally calculated based off of the results of those cornering and acceleration tests.
We know for a fact that it isn't, hence the reason gear ratios have no bearing on a cars PP rating.
 
Back